Hesi Sports Consulting//home_of_hesi_scout

Unclaimed

event_player

Jan Bennett Cagurungan

Shooting Guard · PHI · b. 2008

Latest event year on file: 2026FIBA U18 Asia Cup

//measurables

185 cm

HEIGHT

//15_second_scouting_read

data-led profile

Scoring efficiency-led profile

Scoring efficiency and Scoring load are the clearest relative production signals in this event.

63.5% TSScoring efficiency · 89th event percentile

9.9 PPGScoring load · 75th event percentile

77.0
HESI v2.1: #44
of 188: 72%
sample weight

Performance

1 rated event

Published event intelligence

Film

No public film

Movement and decisions remain unverified

Scouting

No final report

No human evaluation on file

Competition

1 event

Event context and history available

profile_index

//performance_intelligence

Event-scoped HESI impact, role, sample strength, team context, and the questions that still need film verification.

//athlete_dossier · event_intelligence

HESI v2.1 performance dossier

Event-scoped production and two-way impact. This is performance data—not a scout evaluation or universal OVR.

Open event intelligence

FIBA U18 Asia Cup2026

Rank #44 of 188 · Established

HESI v2.1

HESI

77.0

Event performance

77th event percentile

73.1

Prospect index

77th event percentile

ORtg

126.6

Points / 100 poss.

89th event percentile

DRtg

110.3

Lower is better

27th event percentile

NRtg

+16.4

Two-way margin

74th event percentile

Offensive evidence

ORtg 126.6 · 89th event percentile

Defensive evidence

DRtg 110.3 · Stop% 35.6% · Team DRtg 102.3

Sample context

7 games · 151 minutes · 72% weight

//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade

Scoring efficiency-led profileevent-relative description

Scoring efficiency and Scoring load are the clearest relative production signals in this event.

Scoring efficiency

63.5% TS89th event percentile

Scoring load

9.9 PPG75th event percentile

Questions for film

01
Does the film show repeatable advantage creation or mostly connective passing?
02
Do the steals and blocks come from disciplined reads, physical tools, or higher-risk activity?

Explore full efficiency + production profile

//impact_fingerprint

Where the profile separates

HESI performance

77.0

77th event percentile

Prospect index

73.1

77th event percentile

Offensive efficiency

126.6

89th event percentile

Defensive efficiency

110.3

27th event percentile

Two-way margin

+16.4

74th event percentile

Stop percentage

35.6%

14th event percentile

//role_and_production

How the production is shaped

Scoring load

9.9 PPG

75th event percentile

Creation

0.4 APG

26th event percentile

Rebounding

2.3 RPG

42nd event percentile

Defensive activity

0.4 stocks

37th event percentile

Scoring efficiency

63.5% TS

89th event percentile

How to read HESI, PI and Dean Oliver ratings

//reading_guide

How to read the dossier

HESI

Stabilized event performance

A 0–100 event-relative rank of stabilized Net Rating. Smaller samples are pulled toward neutral before players are ordered.

Prospect index

80% HESI performance, 12% competition context and 8% age context. It remains an event-scoped prospect index—not a universal ranking.

ORtg · DRtg · NRtg

Dean Oliver impact

Estimated points created and allowed per 100 possessions, plus their net difference. Lower DRtg is better.

Percentiles compare this athlete only with the published, trust-gated player pool from this event. Missing evidence stays blank and is never converted to zero.

Automated signals and full statistical interpretation

event_signals

Automated Signals

The strongest patterns in this event sample, adjusted to the competition when event percentiles are available.

P89
Offensive Impact
126.6 ORtg · 89th event percentile
P89
Event Efficiency
64% TS on 9.9 PPG · 89th event percentile
Shooter
44% 3PT on 6.4 3PA/G

//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats

What the numbers suggest

HESI performance sits at the 77th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 126.6 ORtg and 110.3 DRtg, producing a +16.4 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are offensive efficiency, scoring efficiency, and scoring load. The lowest relative areas are defensive stops, creation, and defensive efficiency.

Relative strengths

Offensive efficiency
126.6 ORtg
89th event percentile
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.
Scoring efficiency
63.5% TS
89th event percentile
True shooting efficiency compares favorably with the published event pool.
Scoring load
9.9 PPG
75th event percentile
Scoring volume stands out relative to players in the same published event pool.

Relative weaknesses

Defensive stops
35.6% Stop%
14th event percentile
The estimated defensive-stop share is a lower relative area in the available sample.
Creation
0.4 APG
26th event percentile
Assist production is a lower relative area; the model cannot determine unrecorded creation or role constraints.
Defensive efficiency
110.3 DRtg
27th event percentile
The player DRtg is less favorable relative to this event pool; matchup and team context still require film.

//complete_statistical_profile

Every verified signal in this event

Percentile labels compare the player with the same published event pool. Context-only values are shown without inventing a rank.

Offense and scoring

Efficiency, scoring load, shooting shape and creation.

ORtg

126.6

89th event percentile

Estimated points produced per 100 possessions.

Points

9.9 PPG

75th event percentile

Scoring volume per game.

True shooting

63.5%

89th event percentile

Scoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.

Effective FG

62.3%

89th event percentile

Field-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.

Field goals

43.4%

66th event percentile

Overall field-goal percentage.

Three-point shooting

44.4%

context

6.4 attempts per game

Free throws

100.0%

94th event percentile

Free-throw conversion in this event.

Floor%

45.3%

62nd event percentile

Estimated share of possessions producing at least one point.

Assists

0.4 APG

26th event percentile

Recorded passing production per game.

Defense and disruption

Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.

DRtg

110.3

27th event percentile

Estimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.

Team DRtg

102.3

context

Team defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.

Defensive lift

-7.9

10th event percentile

Player DRtg is higher than the team baseline.

Stop%

35.6%

14th event percentile

Estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.

Recorded activity

0.4 STL+BLK

37th event percentile

Steals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.

Estimated stops

22.8

context

Dean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.

Two-way and all-around impact

Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.

Net Rating

+16.4

74th event percentile

Raw ORtg minus DRtg.

Stabilized NRtg

+9.5

77th event percentile

Net Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.

HESI performance

77.0

77th event percentile

Event-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.

Prospect index

73.1

77th event percentile

HESI performance with competition and age context.

PIE

5.2%

77th event percentile

Estimated share of positive game events while on the floor.

Rebounds

2.3 RPG

42nd event percentile

Total rebounding production per game.

Sample and confidence

How much evidence supports the estimates shown above.

Games

context

Published games included in this event line.

Minutes

151.3

context

21.6 minutes per game.

Sample weight

71.6%

context

How strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.

Confidence

Established

context

Model confidence based on available games and minutes.

Event rank

#44

context

Among 188 published players.

Team possessions

592.3

context

Estimated team possessions supporting the defensive context.

model_limits

This is an automated event-relative interpretation, not a scout evaluation or universal player grade.
Box scores cannot measure assignment difficulty, positioning, communication, decision quality, or off-ball value.

//competition_evidence

Where the production happened, how strong the event pool was, and every published competition supporting the profile.

competition_context

Competition

Primary competition is the highest-stature event. Best ranking evidence is the strongest event-relative finish — they may come from different events.

//primary_competition · highest_stature

FIBA U18 Asia Cup

Continental · 2026

9.9

PPG

2.3

RPG

0.4

APG

#44

RANK

competition_history

All competitions

Published competitions, strongest first. Open the statistical record for the complete event line.

FIBA U18 Asia Cup

Continental · 2026

#44/188Event board →

9.9

PPG

2.3

RPG

0.4

APG

Full statistics →

event_context

Event context

FIBA U18 Asia Cup 2026 · 188 ranked players

rank_above · #43Kaito NakamuraF · JPN

//current_rank

#44

of 188 ranked

rank_below · #45MAJAK AWUTIAK MATHIANG MAJAKC · SSD, SYR

#1
Yahya Basaran
Center · AUS
15.7 PPG 10.7 RPG 1.2 APG
#42
Sungmin EOM
Center · KOR
6.3 PPG 4.5 RPG 0.8 APG

//statistical_record

Complete event-specific production lines for auditing the read without flattening different competitions together.

key_stats

Key stats

FIBA U18 Asia Cup · 2026 — scoped to this competition pool.

9.9

PPG

2.3

RPG

0.4

APG

0.3

SPG

0.1

BPG

44%

3P%

64%

TS%

event_stats

Event production

Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.

FIBA U18 Asia Cup2026

7 GP · event rank #44

//quick_read

The line at a glance

9.9

PPG

2.3

RPG

0.4

APG

0.6

TOV/G

2.9

3PM/G

64%

TS%

//event_fingerprint

Performance against this field

Scoring

9.9

P75

Playmaking

0.4

P26

Rebounding

2.3

P42

True shooting

64%

P89

Two-way impact

+16.4

P74

Stops

36%

P14

//shooting_profile

Makes, attempts and efficiency

Field goals

43%

23 made / 53 attempts

3PT

Three-pointers

44%

20 made / 45 attempts

Free throws

100%

3 made / 3 attempts

Shot selection

85% of attempts from three

●2PA 8●3PA 45

//complete_box_score

Production by basketball action

scoring

PTS

9.9 / game

23–53

FGM–FGA

20–45

3PM–3PA

3–3

FTM–FTA

creation

AST

0.4 / game

TOV

0.6 / game

0.75×

AST:TOV

rebounding

REB

2.3 / game

OREB

DREB

2.3

REB/G

defense

STL

0.3 / game

BLK

0.1 / game

STL+BLK

0.4 / game

//hesi_and_dean_oliver

Efficiency and two-way impact

77.0

HESI

73.1

126.6

ORtg

110.3

DRtg

+16.4

NRtg

+9.5

Stable NRtg

36%

Stop%

45%

Floor%

62%

eFG%

PIE

102.3

Team DRtg

-7.9

Def. lift

//player_context

Biography, achievements, public identity, and profile ownership provide context without entering the performance rating.

player_context

The person behind the numbers

Background supplied by the athlete or verified profile source. Performance ratings remain separate from biography and achievements.

claim_this_profile

Is this you?

This profile was auto-generated from public tournament data. Claim it to connect your highlight reel, get scouted, and own your story on HESI.

CLAIM_THIS_PROFILE

data_source · fiba — statistics retain their original event attribution.